Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafesj

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]


BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo

tremodt 10 Jan 02 - 11:49 PM
harpgirl 11 Jan 02 - 12:00 AM
Peg 11 Jan 02 - 12:43 AM
Mark Cohen 11 Jan 02 - 12:46 AM
Bert 11 Jan 02 - 01:04 AM
Seamus Kennedy 11 Jan 02 - 01:19 AM
katlaughing 11 Jan 02 - 01:20 AM
Mark Cohen 11 Jan 02 - 02:14 AM
pavane 11 Jan 02 - 02:41 AM
katlaughing 11 Jan 02 - 03:38 AM
GUEST,frankie 11 Jan 02 - 03:44 AM
katlaughing 11 Jan 02 - 04:06 AM
GUEST,frankie 11 Jan 02 - 04:40 AM
GUEST 11 Jan 02 - 08:46 AM
McGrath of Harlow 11 Jan 02 - 02:27 PM
Lonesome EJ 11 Jan 02 - 02:31 PM
katlaughing 11 Jan 02 - 02:40 PM
Mrrzy 11 Jan 02 - 03:10 PM
Lonesome EJ 11 Jan 02 - 03:29 PM
DougR 11 Jan 02 - 03:36 PM
GUEST,Mark Clark (via public proxy) 11 Jan 02 - 03:38 PM
Bobert 11 Jan 02 - 03:39 PM
CarolC 11 Jan 02 - 04:02 PM
DougR 11 Jan 02 - 04:55 PM
LoopySanchez 11 Jan 02 - 05:09 PM
Bennet Zurofsky 11 Jan 02 - 05:22 PM
DougR 11 Jan 02 - 05:51 PM
Mark Cohen 11 Jan 02 - 05:51 PM
CarolC 11 Jan 02 - 05:59 PM
LoopySanchez 11 Jan 02 - 06:09 PM
LoopySanchez 11 Jan 02 - 06:14 PM
CarolC 11 Jan 02 - 06:24 PM
Bobert 11 Jan 02 - 06:46 PM
CarolC 11 Jan 02 - 06:49 PM
Tweed 11 Jan 02 - 07:45 PM
kendall 11 Jan 02 - 08:01 PM
toadfrog 11 Jan 02 - 08:32 PM
CarolC 11 Jan 02 - 08:58 PM
Bobert 11 Jan 02 - 09:42 PM
CarolC 11 Jan 02 - 09:49 PM
Tweed 11 Jan 02 - 09:56 PM
Bobert 11 Jan 02 - 10:11 PM
Bobert 11 Jan 02 - 10:25 PM
McGrath of Harlow 11 Jan 02 - 10:28 PM
CarolC 11 Jan 02 - 10:32 PM
CarolC 11 Jan 02 - 10:34 PM
GUEST 11 Jan 02 - 10:38 PM
McGrath of Harlow 11 Jan 02 - 10:41 PM
CarolC 11 Jan 02 - 10:52 PM
Bobert 11 Jan 02 - 10:52 PM

Share Thread
more
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:













Subject: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: tremodt
Date: 10 Jan 02 - 11:49 PM

I wonder who got the most out of enron


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: harpgirl
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 12:00 AM

...It will be like Silverado. Anyone remember????


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Peg
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 12:43 AM

Good God, let's hope so.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 12:46 AM

Then again, it could be like Teapot Dome...

Aloha,
Mark


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Bert
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 01:04 AM

Right on there Harpgirl. They tore the new Silverado building in Colorado Springs down. There's a Walgreen's there now.

The cost to the taxpayers was 1.3 billion.

Search the web for Neil AND Siverado for all the details.

Family values!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Seamus Kennedy
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 01:19 AM

I doubt it, bit I hope to hell they investigate it with all the malice and vituperation they did the Clinton/Whitewater non-scandal. Let's see if they come up with a monomaniacal Ken Starr equivalent to blow 30 million on this little beauty.

Seamus


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: katlaughing
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 01:20 AM

I hope it is his AND Cheney's downfall! Of course, because of actions like THESE, we may never know.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 02:14 AM

Given the choice, I think I'd be more comfortable having a President who was in bed with an intern than one who was in bed with a major corporation. But dammit, Jim, I'm a doctor, not a political commentator!

Aloha,
Mark


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: pavane
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 02:41 AM

I wonder who ordered Athur Andersen to destroy all those documents? Who did they incriminate?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: katlaughing
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 03:38 AM

Behind every Bush there's a Shrub and behind every shrub there's somebody taking the piss!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: GUEST,frankie
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 03:44 AM

I just hope congressional democrats reclaim their cojones and conduct a thorough investigation. Thanks for the link, kat. f


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: katlaughing
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 04:06 AM

You're welcome, frankie. I don't know about them finding their balls, we might have to get them some fake ones like they do for dogs so they don't feel badly without a *package,* BUT there are some people trying to help them find their spines, though from the looks of it, they're not doing a very good job!


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: GUEST,frankie
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 04:40 AM

LOL kat, let's just hope neuticles are made available for humans before it's too late. It's also nice to see that remote outpost of backboned dems. Here's a brief audio overview of the Enron thing that ran on ATC yesterday. click here

f


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 08:46 AM

I agree a bizzillion % about Cheney and his corporado band of marauders. Like the Bechtel boys of the 80s dark days of Republican rule (remember that ETSI coal slurry pipeline they wanted to build out of the Wyoming fields?), this is Baby Bush's bandito days. The corporations are just pulling the trucks up to the Treasury's doorstep, just like they did under Reagan/Bush.

And the Democrats helping them sneak everything else out the back door.

As I recall, the Special Prosecutor law was allowed to expire in the final days of the Clinton. Which means there is only the Bush Justice Department to investigate. Unless you count the Congressional investigation--but that would be a total waste of time and taxpayer dollars. Congress won't stand up to Bush because all the financial contributors would be pissed as hell if they did. Nope, this is one where I expect Bush will remain above the fray and will get off scot-free, just like his daddy before him did with the S & L scandal. Which should have been of Teapot Dome proportions, but barely made front page news, due to that wonderful Gulf War. Republicans just love to use their dirty little wars as subterfuge and camoflage.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 02:27 PM

They knew he was a crook when they voted for him. What's he supposed to have done now that he hasn't done just as blatantly before, and been rewarded for it?

Mind, there were people who claimed to be surprised when Nixon was caught lying and Clinton turned out to be lecherous bastard.

It's a bit as if people had got indignant at Abraham Lincoln because a few years down the line from electing him they suddenly noticed he had a beard.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 02:31 PM

I couldn't get frankie's link to work, but would appreciate a link to an overview of the entire Enron situation.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: katlaughing
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 02:40 PM

It's a link to npr, LeeJ, and I've fixed it, so it works now. Gotta go, but I'll see if I can hunt up some more when I get back.

kat


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Mrrzy
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 03:10 PM

O katmaking melaughuproriously, what a great site! And what burns me is all the talk Bush is making about the shareholders... what about the EMPLOYEES???


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Lonesome EJ
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 03:29 PM

Found this, but it predates the bankruptcy, and some may find it slanted since its from The Progressive.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: DougR
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 03:36 PM

Mrzzy: probably most of the Enron employees WERE shareholders through their 401k plans.

LEJ: The Progressive biased? Perish the thought. :>)

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: GUEST,Mark Clark (via public proxy)
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 03:38 PM

You know, it makes me sorry we ever elected him. Oh, wait... we didn't.

      - Mark


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 03:39 PM

Now there's nothing this ol' hillbilly would rather see than the unelected adminstration skirm but ol' bobert smells something stinky here other than a bunch of rich folks robbing their dedicated employees. I'd rather not replay something similar to the hate-driven investigations of the 90's. They became a sideshow and prevented the government from doing what we pay them to do. I'd rather see the Dems focus on the trickel down voodoo economics that the other side is hell bent on repeating and take the moral high ground on Enron and let Junior's Justice Department hang itself, which it will...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 04:02 PM

I have to say that I probably agree with you on that one, Bobert. Although I need to do a lot of catching up on this issue before I can claim to have an informed opinion about it.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: DougR
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 04:55 PM

No point in getting into a "yes he was" "no he wasn't" elected Mark, and I'm sure you are aware of that. He was elected, though that news may not have reached the Islands yet. :>)

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: LoopySanchez
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 05:09 PM

Doug, some folks are just mad that overseas military personnel were allowed to vote and cancelled out the homeless cigarette-bribed vote, as well as the prison vote. It's best to let them vent their anger all at once, or else they may do it at the polls when they "throw a tantrum", like Peter Jennings said the entire nation did in the 1994 congressional elections...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Bennet Zurofsky
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 05:22 PM

What follows is a summary of Enron and related news stories regarding Bush and oil interests that are floating around. I do not know the author and cannot vouch for his sources, but it well summarizes what I have been seeing in several places around the net.

If this stuff is true, 2002 should be a very interesting year.

******

Please distribute this to everyone you know. It was written by William Pitt, a teacher in Boston (www.willpitt.com) and it describes two scandals which have the potential to uproot a certain noxious Bush now occupying the Oval Office.

HELL TO PAY

"Depend upon it, Sir, when a man knows he is to be hanged in a fortnight, it concentrates his mind wonderfully." - Samuel Johnson

Some time just before January 7th, 2002, an asteroid capable of pulverizing a good-sized nation flashed through the void, passing perilously close to Earth. Had it struck our planet, the impact would have had global consequences. The energy of the strike would have been equivalent to the explosion of a number of large atomic weapons. From the media perspective, it would have been the biggest story since the extinction of the dinosaurs.

At some point in the next six months, a small, darkened corner of George W. Bush's consciousness will wish the thing had hit us. The apocalypse he and his fundamentalist buddies have been waiting for would have been at hand, and a number of potentially calamitous questions about to be put to his administration would have been avoided.

Sadly for him, the planet spins on. Beneath the unpierced stratosphere, the electronic beams of news agencies like CNN and the Associated Press have begun to spread like a widow's web from city to city and house to house. Carried on this invisible wind are rumors of doom, negligence and greed. Each and every one of these rumors lead inexorably back to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, which will soon be issuing significant numbers of visitor passes to lawyers if the pattern holds much longer.

Whichever part of the nation that never heard of the energy giant Enron Corporation has recently been introduced to the company in odious context. The story thus far is nothing less than astounding: Enron, a company valued in the billions on Wall Street, suddenly filed for the largest bankruptcy claim in the history of the known universe. 4,000 employees were abruptly shown the door after having been barred from dumping the company stock, meant to fund their retirement, while it was worth something. Meanwhile, Enron executives in the know were able to dump the stock, back when it was the gold standard on the Street, for a cool $1 billion.

Apparently, Enron was ailing for quite a long time. The aforementioned executives were able to maintain the mirage of financial viability by stuffing the debt into what are called 'off-balance-sheet partnerships.' In essence, each of the executives built personal banking bunkers and hid what has been revealed to be staggering Enron debts within them, keeping fact that the company was hemorrhaging money off the publicly displayed balance sheets. This maintained the company's credit rating, and allowed it to continue doing business.

This went on for four years, which means several things. It means most of the Enron executives were aware of and/or actively participating in this highly criminal and irresponsible activity. It means the stockholders, including 4,000 loyal Enron employees, were lied to. It probably means that the executives knew the stock value was doomed when they bailed out and cashed in several months ago. It means they let their employees lose the retirement funds they believed were growing within their Enron stock portfolios. It means a lot of people got screwed by a pack of sharp operators who didn't give a damn about anyone but themselves.

All this could simply be chalked up as yet another story of corporate greed run amok, until the umbilical political and financial connections between Bush and Enron are illuminated. Enron's capo, Kenneth Lay, was perhaps the best financial friend George W. Bush has ever known. Lay and a number of Enron employees essentially bankrolled Bush's 2000 Presidential campaign, going so far as to lend Bush an Enron corporate jet for trips between whistle stops. Before Bush got White House stars in his eyes, he worked very closely with Enron on energy policy in Texas.

This close connection led to the Bush administration's hiring of a number of influential individuals within Enron's orbit for important government positions:

- Thomas E. White, Bush's Secretary of the Army, was once Vice-Chairman of Enron Energy Service, and held millions in Enron stock;

- Presidential Advisor Karl Rove owned as much as $250,000 in Enron stock;

- Economic adviser Larry Lindsay leapt straight from Enron to his current White House job;

- Federal Trade Representative Robert B. Zoellick did the same;

- SEC Chairman Harvey Pitts was hand-picked by Kenneth Lay for the position, due to his notorious aversion to governmental regulation of any kind.

There are some thirty one Bush administration officials who had a line item for Enron in their stock portfolio, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. It is fair to say that the woebegone corporation held, and continues to hold, enormous influence over the day-to-day machinations of Federal government policy. One wonders if Bush's recent gutting of the Clean Air Act, a decision designed to improve the fortunes of companies like Enron, was the brainchild of people with deep connections to the energy industry.

The trail of influence left by Enron leads also to the scabrous heart ventricles of Vice President Dick Cheney, who admitted recently to six separate meetings with Enron executives while formulating the Bush administration's energy policy. Cheney, a former executive of the Halliburton Petroleum interest, was in charge of creating this policy. For reasons soon to be exposed by subpoena, Cheney refused to detail the specifics of the creation of this policy, which included the multiple Enron meetings. The General Accounting Office was preparing to sue Cheney to reveal this information when the September 11th attacks took place. Those subpoenas may be dusted off and mailed within a month. In the meantime, the Justice Department is preparing a serious criminal investigation into the collapse of Enron. The democratically-controlled Senate is planning hearings on the matter as well. Columnist Robert Scheer has referred to the Bush administration's involvement in the Enron debacle as "Whitewater in spades." One wonders if "Watergate" would be a more appropriate comparison.

Bush's own dealings within the energy industry carry a disturbingly familiar echo to the Enron situation: once upon a time, he was a high-ranking officer of a petroleum interest called Harken Oil. On June 22, 1990, Bush sold his Harken stock and made $848,560, earning him a 200% profit. One week later, Harken announced a $23.2 million loss in quarterly earnings and its stock dropped sharply, losing 60 percent of its value over the next six months. Bush made a bundle while the other investors lost millions. Harken was Enron in miniature, and might have served as a warning to the American people if the press had chosen to pay any attention to it during the 2000 Presidential campaign.

There is a school of thought, espoused primarily by Republicans, that any investigation into potentially dishonorable or illegal actions by the Bush administration is tantamount to treason. We are at war, undeclared though it may be, and Bush must be free to prosecute this war vigorously, so as to defend our freedom and bring the murderers of American civilians to justice. If reports recently aired on CNN have any credence, however, Bush and his people may well have to answer for actions that make the Enron catastrophe look like a jaywalking offense, actions that led directly to the incredible carnage in New York and Washington, D.C.

In 1998, during the Clinton administration, the U.S.-based energy concern Unocal canceled plans to exploit massive natural gas deposits in Turkmenistan. They had planned to run a pipeline from Turkmenistan to Pakistan, where the natural gas could have been processed for Asian and Western energy markets. The idea was scuttled after Clinton ordered the cruise missile bombing of Afghanistan in response to a terrorist attack upon U.S. embassies in Africa which were planned and executed by Osama bin Laden.

The pipeline would have had to pass through Afghanistan, and Unocal was given the message in Technicolor by Clinton's people that Taliban-controlled Afghanistan was not to be given any sort of financial boon.

Apparently, the Bush administration found no moral dilemma in dealing with the Taliban to get to the gas. Immediately upon their arrival in Washington, a vigorous courtship of the Taliban was undertaken by Bush's people. In fact, if former U.N. weapons inspector Richard Butler is to be believed, the Bush administration had a vested interest in strengthening and stabilizing the Taliban regime, because a stable regime would compel investors to revive the Turkmenistan natural gas pipeline deal. The Taliban, demon of the moment, was the Bush administration's idea of a 'stable' government. Stable enough, anyway, to see the pipeline through.

The connections between Bush and the Taliban became so close that the Taliban went so far as to hire an expert on U.S. public relations named Laila Helms, so as to smooth the way between the two regimes. Meetings between the two nations continued at a high level, the last of which occurred in August, scant weeks before the September 11th attacks. All of these actions were taken to exploit the vast energy reserves in Turkmenistan for the benefit of American energy corporations.

The cozy relationship between Bush and the Taliban frustrated the investigative efforts of former Deputy Director of the FBI John O'Neill. O'Neill was the FBI's chief bin Laden hunter, in charge of the investigations into the bin Laden-connected bombings of the World Trade Center in 1993, the destruction of an American troop barracks in Saudi Arabia in 1996, the African embassy bombings in 1998, and the attack upon the U.S.S. Cole in 2000.

O'Neill quit the FBI in protest two weeks before the destruction of the World Trade Center towers. He did so because his investigation was hindered by the Bush administration's connections to the Taliban, and by the interests of American petroleum companies. O'Neill was quoted as stating, "The main obstacles to investigating Islamic terrorism were U.S. oil corporate interests, and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it." After leaving the FBI, O'Neill took a position as head of security for the World Trade Center. He died on September 11th, 2001, trying to save people trapped by the attack, when the towers came down on top of him. The irony in this, simply, is horrifying. In essence, the Federal agent who knew more about bin laden than any living American was kept from investigating terrorist threats against this country. He was hindered because the Bush administration was desperate to cultivate the favor of the Taliban, who held terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden in great esteem, so as to gain access to lucrative natural gas deposits in Turkmenistan. If these allegations prove true, Bush and his friends allowed this affinity to hamstring investigations that could have thwarted bin Laden's September plans. If these allegations prove true, everything since September 11th has been a massive cover-up operation in which American soldiers and thousands of Afghan civilians have died. If these allegations prove true, the Bush administration has the blood of thousands of American civilians on its hands. If these allegations carry even the faintest whiff of credibility, George W. Bush and members of his administration stand in taint of high treason and murder.

On November 7th, 2000, a clear majority of Americans came to the conclusion that George W. Bush was unfit to govern this nation. For a variety of dark and controversial reasons, that conclusion was thrown over. Sometime soon, if the media's electronic web continues to carry these sordid stories of corruption, greed and death, the American people will come to fully understand the consequences of that failed election.

It is one thing to coddle and court a corrupt energy company for political and financial gain. It is quite another to coddle and court a murderous terrorist-supporting regime, hindering anti-terrorism investigations in the process, for the purpose of exploiting valuable natural resources. The former cost a number of people their retirement funds. The latter has cost thousands of people their lives. One is criminal. The other is abominable. George W. Bush is deeply implicated in both. There will be hell to pay.

extra "<" deleted and
paragraph breaks added by
- el joeclone -


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: DougR
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 05:51 PM

"Do not know the author, and can't vouch for his sources." Nuff said.

If GWB is proved to be guilty of some impropriety in regard to Enron, as Clinton was with all he was charged with, I will be the first in line to say, impeach him.

DougR


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Mark Cohen
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 05:51 PM

Wrong Mark, DougR! But thanks for thinking of me!

Aloha,
Mark


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 05:59 PM

Kinda takes your breath away, don't it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: LoopySanchez
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 06:09 PM

A few observations on the story: Or should >I say, >"A few >observations on >the story":

Did this "Teacher from Boston" somehow fail to discover that Clinton chose not to take up other nations on the offer to turn over Bin Laden to the U.S. on THREE seperate occasions?

Al Gore's family trust contained half a million in shares of Occidental oil that tripled as a result of Clinton's manufactured oil shortages. I didn't see Brokaw or Jennings leading off the news with that story either, so there's no need to complain about their ignoring Bush's oil profits.

I'm surprised that there weren't more than 31 people with Enron in their portfoilio. It was a huge company, and I'm guessing more people than not had Enron in their portfolios at some point in time. What's next? Should we do a search to see how many people in Bush's cabinet had shares of Amtrack, then suggest that they hired the terrorists to hijack the United and American flights so their Amtrack stock would surge with the nationwide increased fear of flying?

In short, the above story makes for great fiction, but in the end, all it does is make me glad that I don't have kids going to school in Boston.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: LoopySanchez
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 06:14 PM

I keep wondering why nobody is saying "Let the President get on with the business of the nation, instead of constantly pestering him with these phony scandals that are really all just a big Left-wing conspiracy". Change a few words and it sounds about eight years worth of familiar, doesn't it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 06:24 PM

Loopy, if any of that story is true, we need to know about it. If any of it is true, are you saying that the information should be supressed?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 06:46 PM

DougR; Wrong. Selected, not elected...see or, bettre yet, read "Supreme Injustice" by Alan Dershowitz

DougR #2: Wrong, Clinton was not found guilty of everything he was charged with. Though no indictments came down he was "publicly" charged from day 1 until his last day some 8 years later by folks who I guess are your heros. And they are still making charges. Why? Because they are the super rich who really don't work so that gives them plenty of time to sit around, grumble about Slick Willie and remenisce about the good old days when ol' Joe would keep them upitty commies in their place. Fact is, that after the 8 year chase, all your buddies had was the old boy doing what a lot of men who have been caught fooloing around... deny it.

Now lastly, Doug, I'm with Tweed. If you're ever in my neck of the woods, lets get together for a old one, but please don't try to convince me that should the Dems follow your guys blueprint for harassing a sitting President that they are terrorists and traitors cause that dog don't hunt....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 06:49 PM

DougR, here's something I find myself wondering. This is just a hypothetical question, but let's say, hypothetically, that the stuff in that article is true. In such a case, would you want to see the truth come out, or would you rather see Bush get away with it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Tweed
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 07:45 PM

That's a pretty wild tale up there, but I think some of us have been thinking along those lines already. It doesn't feel real good to think along those lines but it's been in mine for a while now. Things just seem a little to orchestrated, like a Robert Ludlum novel or something. Maybe Hollywood is writing our future now.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: kendall
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 08:01 PM

The cigarette bribed homeless Loopy? Funny you should mention the overseas vote. How many millions did the republicans spend to influence our servicemen and women overseas? Somewhere around 200 million bucks aS I recall. Sure, all they did was promise them a pay raise, then, they allowed the absentee ballots which came in unstamped and too late (legallY) to be counted. Folks, they are ALL self serving scoundrels. It's just a matter of which gang does the least damage, and Clintons sex problem didn't harm me one bit.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: toadfrog
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 08:32 PM

Yeah.

It appears Clinton was involved with a woman, and was asked irrelevant questions about it in a frivolous lawsuit, and lied. I didn't like Clinton all that much until the impeachment proceedings. On listening to 5-6 hours of impeachment proceedings and hearing what his enemies had to say, I concluded he must be the greatest president since George Washington. With enemies like that, who needs a friend?

I don't know whether Bush was involved in criminal activities in the Enron matter or not. But I'm quite sure that if he was, he won't be made to suffer for it. Too many highly influential people were into that. Any investigation is bound to get squashed. Tends to make one cynical.

Query: Am I just turning into a geezer, or has the tone of politics gotten a whole lot worse in the last 20 years or so? Makes you wish we had the Commies back. Bin Laden is too small-time a villain to give us a sense of national purpose.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 08:58 PM

Based on what I saw on some news programs tonight, I can see one possible scenario in which Bush and his cohorts might not be protected in this case. A lot of investors (the numbers I heard tonight were millions of people who lost billions of dollars) lost a lot of money. There is some concern by the top corporations that the stock market will suffer because of this Enron situation. The perception being that the market isn't safe for investors.

I also heard that the securities market was considered to be one of the safest because of the accuracy of the auditing and reporting of the financial wellbeing of the companies in question. And this situation is causing a lot of concern that people will lose confidence in the securities market for this reason. The big coporate interests find themselves in a very vulnerable position right now, and I'm guessing they aren't very happy about it. In fact I heard that they are extremely uneasy about this situation

If Bush and his compatriots did in fact have anything to do with any of this, I can see the possibility that the other big players who stand to be really hurt by this situation might want Bush out of the way in order to protect their own interests. They may be seeing him as a liability right now. Just a theory, but something I won't be surprised about if it happens.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 09:42 PM

Yo, Toadfrog, you're right. And I have a theory on it. We now have a bunch of crybaby conservatives trying to turn back the clock and get us all back in the cotton fields. In the 60's it was a bunch of folks looking thru the windshield rather than a bunch of oldsters and oldster wannabes looking in the rear view mirror. And CarolC, Junior has been way out of order since his "selection" by his daddy's Supreme Court. First thing he did was "act" as he had been elected. Ha! Then he set out an agenda that, without his little war, would have had had him in the empeachment chair two years into his presidency. Now his challenge, and those of the ruling class, is how to keep their little war interesting long enough to maybe, just maybe, get them a second term. I persoanally don't think they can do thise without one of their own doing some serious anthrax stuff, just like the what we have just seen, but when you are dealing with the ruling class, and any thing is possible since they own the anthrax and just about every thing else on this earth as well...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 09:49 PM

The difference right now, at least the way it looks to me, is that the big guys are now seeing themselves in a situation where sticking together might not work for them any more. They might decide that they want to look after their own interests in this case, which might mean turning their backs on Bush. As I said, just a theory, but it won't surprise me if it happens.

btw: I think I might have seen your cousin in his Bushmobile on Rt. 230 last week ;-)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Tweed
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 09:56 PM

Calm yerself Boberdz, yer gettin' yoreself all worked up again. They's too many of 'em over here and from what I've seen they got rooms full of duck tape. Yoo'll get yoreself duck taped to a damn banjo or somethin if you don't settle down somewhat....He's fine folks I've seen him get this way before whenever Li'l Buck's name comes up.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 10:11 PM

They got duct tape here, Tweed?

Hi, everyone, Iz... ahhh.. Bobert (smiles and tries to look harmless) Ahh, nice belt buckle there, Doug. Iz sorry if Iz...ahh... got carried away. My wife, the P-Vine, has been trying to get me off my medication and well... ahh, like Tweed said... Iz okay.... really.

So whad I say, Tweed? Weren't as bad as back in Tweedsburg, was it? Ouch! That hurts, Tweed. Ain't you got no respect for your elders? Ouch. Okay, okay. I'll behave.

$#%$#&(&(%$##%$#@&%)&*()&^..................

Danged......


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 10:25 PM

CarolC: Now ol bobert can't get his recolector to pull up Rt. 230 but the way I figure I've got 17 first cousins, 97 second cousins and 413 thirds. Thats a lot of Christmas cards, I'm here to say. But the Bushmobile is a good hint. Didn't happen to have the rear bumper pushed up like someone tried to push over a stump in reverse, did it? Well, if it had a "Goffers Need Love" bumper sticker on it then it was my cousin, Theordore Timpkins, from 17 miles south west of Romney, WV. Did he have his Davey Crockett coonskin hat on when you saw him?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 10:28 PM

The thing that is sick about these scandals is the same thing that was sick about that argument about counting votes last year. It's that people line up on according to what side they want to win, instead of focussing on the evidence and the facts.

Any true democrats (and I mean that with a small d) owe it to themselves and their country to set aside partisan preferances, and to demand that justice should be done. With the election that meant fighting to malke sure that all the voters were counted, regardless of the outcome; with other scandals it means wanting the whole truth to come out and be weighed dispassionately.

Any time you find that people are lining up along partisan lines on issues like this it's a sign of a faltering democracy. You expect it of politicians maybe, but not of honest citizens.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 10:32 PM

Rt. 230's the one that runs up from 340 to Shepherdstown. That car had the Bush/Chaney racing stripe down the middle ;-)

I used to live in Romney. Didn't see anyone with a Davey Crocket coonskin hat there, though.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 10:34 PM

McGrath, I think you might have meant to say republicans with a small r in your second paragraph.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 10:38 PM

You seem to be forgetting one small detail there McGrath--it was the honest citizen who lost the vote in 2000.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 10:41 PM

No - you get (small d) democrats in countries that aren't Republics. And you get plenty of (small r) republicans who aren't (small d) democrats too, in all sorts of countries.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 10:52 PM

I think I understand the distinction you're trying to make there McGrath, but I think you might find that using the term democrat (whether or not you use the small d) is going to confuse a lot of people in the US, and make it very difficult for you to get your point across here.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Is Enron dubbyas waterloo
From: Bobert
Date: 11 Jan 02 - 10:52 PM

CarolC: That was my...ahhh... 1st or 2nd cousin Teodore for sure. He'd probably been up at Rufus's that very day getting his Bush/Chaney racing srtipe on the Bushmobile over at Ott's trailer court. They all got 'em up here in this holler.

And don't worry about McGrath, girl, he's Doug's cousin.

Small world.....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate


Next Page

 


This Thread Is Closed.


Mudcat time: 23 September 2:51 PM EDT

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.